North Sea Helicopter flying limits

[nkt2000]

Question for anyone flying helicopters to offshore platforms in the North Sea from Aberdeen:


What are your flying limits with respect to sea state?
Do you ask the platform or the ERRV what is the prospect for rescue and recovery?
If so, do you ask what the means of recovery would be i.e. FRC or Dacon Scoop?
If the answer is Dacon Scoop, would you still fly?

[Noiseboy]

For the UK sector, the CAA took control of the limits for sea state after the various puma issues prompted them to act, the limit is dependant on the aircraft limit or demonstrated capability, in practice this is significant wave height of 6m as indicated on the offshore met office weather website.

The offshore weather reports (regardless of sea state) indicate that recovery is or is not available for a flight, this only applies to the immediate area around a rig since landing and takeoff are deemed to be the most critical phases. So would only ask if rescue is available if they had ommitted this required piece of info from their standard weather report.

Some ask, some don't, some weather reports specify it without being asked, some don't, it is an approved method, though many think it shouldn't be. Rescue vessels are not obliged to offer rescue in sea states that aircraft can legally fly over. When the operators manuals said fly up to 7m in accordance with the OGP guidelines, it was often the standby boat that went u/s before the sea state for flying, not so much now 6m is the limit.

Some do, some don't.

[Ex Machina]

The Dacon scoop is a 'recovery' device (of bodies), not a method of 'rescue'. If it is the sole means available, the flight should not depart.

[Self loading bear]

The Dacon scoop is a 'recovery' device (of bodies), not a method of 'rescue'. If it is the sole means available, the flight should not depart.

EM

I am not so sure about that.
For ERRV's this can be a valid rescue method.
Dacon Rescue Scoop - Dacon Rescue Equipment (http://www.dacon.no/rescue/products/dacon-rescue-scoop/)

I believe all ERRV also have a FRC
Fast Rescue Craft.

Dacon from a platform would indeed be unacceptable (FRC out of service)
as one would need to be able to swim to it.

So from a platform the FRC needs to be servicable or a ERRV should be present.

For transit we need to hope for the best that ERRV is within Action radius of its FRC's. But this is never fully covered.

SLB

[nkt2000]

Thanks for the responses. However, I am no further forward. I was hoping someone would post the actual flying policy rather than personal opinions. Noiseboy has come closes to an actual answer. Please keep responding.

I have been asked by PM why I am asking. I work for a company providing rescue and recovery services and am interested in what is actually expected rather than what the guideline performance standards are.

[Ed Winchester]

Well, if that is the case, would it not be a little more professional to approach the four offshore companies directly, rather than seeking information on an anonymous Internet forum.

[Noiseboy]

And thats probably the point, in the absense of any official ban from either regulation or operation manuals, the Dacon Scoop is an approved rescue method (by whoever regulates this - HSE?) and so it comes down to personal opinion. If rescue is said to be available on the offshore weather report, then the flight is permitted depart.

However, some will refuse based on dacon scoop being the only available method, others will fly. Sometimes this will be on principal as above, or others will add discretionary safety buffers depending on conditions, e.g. ARA + Dacon scoop no, VFR and Dacon scoop OK as a very basic example.

So as a rescue provider you say yes or no depending on your contracts, requirements and regulations, you can or cannot offer compliant rescue mothods, and if the sea state, as per the met office model (not offshore reports) is less than 6m significant all the way to and from the platform, you may, or may not get a flight if dacon scoop is the only usable method.

[Langball]

•What are your flying limits with respect to sea state?. 6m significant wave height as per CAP1145. Aircraft floats are certified to 6 m. And even if they were certified to more, the CAP1145 6m limit would still apply.
•Do you ask the platform or the ERRV what is the prospect for rescue and recovery?. No. All that subjectivity was taken away when CAP1145 was introduced.
•If so, do you ask what the means of recovery would be i.e. FRC or Dacon Scoop?. No. The master of the vessel will use whatever he/she sees fit on the day. We all accept that the Dacon Scoop might be the only available tool at the higher end of the sea states. But that's why we have an FRC and the Dacon Scoop.
•If the answer is Dacon Scoop, would you still fly?. If the FRC is serviceable, but not available due to the weather, and the FRC is available, then we'll still fly.

Our ERRV has a Rescue & Recovery Performance Standard. And we carry our regular R&R trials, validated by an independent third party, to confirm that we can meet the standard.

[nkt2000]

Well, if that is the case, would it not be a little more professional to approach the four offshore companies directly, rather than seeking information on an anonymous Internet forum.
I have done that but hoped that I would also get some useful info from pilots.

[Ex Machina]

Declaring the Dacon scoop as the only means of recovery seems to have gone out of fashion at the moment, replaced by a simple yes/no tick box for rescue & recovery available and the statement "good prospect of recovery" in the remarks section of the weather report. But, if an aircraft captain launches knowing that this is the case, he also knows that following a ditching, his passengers are highly likely to be severely injured or killed in the recovery process (by the Dacon scoop). That is why BALPA do not agree that this would be a satisfactory situation.

[albatross]

Slight thread drift.
In olden daze. It was normal to depart slightly out of wind. The thought being that if one the hamsters died and you were forced to ditch you would not end up in the water directly upwind of the rig drifting rapidly backwards into the rig.
Then the gawds started preaching.."Depart directly into the wind".
Thoughts?

[John R81]

EM - wow! All persons rescued are highly likely to be severely injured or killed That's not what the Dacon website (http://www.dacon.no/rescue/products/dacon-rescue-scoop/)says.

Have you asked them to change their statement?

[212man]

Slight thread drift.
In olden daze. It was normal to depart slightly out of wind. The thought being that if one the hamsters died and you were forced to ditch you would not end up in the water directly upwind of the rig drifting rapidly backwards into the rig.
Then the gawds started preaching.."Depart directly into the wind".
Thoughts?

Saves having to swim to the rig, plus if you are into wind you may get away with not ditching in the first place ;-)

[albatross]

Lol 212man hope you are doing well.
Still imagine if you will that the Bung Vertileap doesn't.
So now you are upwind drifting rapidly towards the steel obstacle to the rear.
You evacuate to the rafts and cut away. Rafts rapidly drift to the rig followed by the slower helicopter. Rafts impact the rig..followed in short order by 20,000 lbs of helicopter. It's going to be an interesting afternoon.

[[email protected]]

EM - wow! All persons rescued are highly likely to be severely injured or killed That's not what the Dacon website says.
Notice on their website it doesn't show a live human being rescued - not surprising since being rolled down the scoop until you hit the side of the vessel and are then rolled up and into the vessel looks like a pretty good way to injure someone who was OK and worsen injuries of anyone who wasn't.

With more than one person in the scoop it would get very dangerous.

I think that scoop must come under the heading of 'last resort' rather than 'great way to rescue people'.

[helicrazi]

He looks alive to me

[EESDL]

nkt2000

The value of your research will be to ascertain the credibility of what the Captain says and what they actually 'do' when they feel the hot breath of the client demanding a service, with the shadow of the 3-month notice looming....
You might find that with the gradual reduction of in-depth experience and deep understanding of why the rules and regs are there in the first place; coupled with the knowledge of how Met and Sea State reporting has evolved; along with the evidence that 'blind eyes' are a plenty when it's 'coming home time', flights continue to be flown regardless of common sense or logic.
I have witnessed an experienced and 'current' ERRV crew run over a rescue dummy in calm seas.
The DACON scoop was designed to repatriate victims not to rescue survivors - and yes, the manufacturer has changed the website because they can. The 'mission creep' of such an atrocious piece of equipment is disingenuous but if no one has to use it.....
North sea rigs still using un-calibrated weather reporting equipment as they fail to re-calibrate iaw regs or after another piece of hardware has been erected in its vicinity.
SS6, don't make me laugh. Little point in being able to ditch if you cant be rescued before the bags give up - and please, no one thinks they can transfer into a life raft in those conditions, do they??
A captain's estate will be sued by their employer and victims families with a blink of an eye if any casualties occur below SS6 because it can be argued that SS is not the only consideration.
The trouble is, with the general 'dumbing-down' of the role, and the eagerness for operators and clients to try and reduce everything to a flowchart, there is a danger that the big picture will be lost and lives with it.
Whilst insurers insist on min hours, they don't also insist on the big bollock5 required to say 'no'.
It sickens me when I hear a pathetic excuse for Ops Manager saying 'Final responsibility lies with the Captain' when it suits them but the company does it's level-best to undermine the skipper or the process at every turn - knowing full well that the regs have the Skipper as the accountable one.
There are captains who don't like flying but like the money and will seek ways to put flight on hold til next crew signs on.
There are Captains that think job-security relies on never saying 'no'.
STATOIL's report goes someway in acknowledging the 'mission creep' and lack of accountability or understanding when it comes to the holistic affect of individual departments having their 'say' and 'tail wagging dog' etc.
However, the cynic in many of us know the report was a reaction instigated by the legal team and not the safety team.